http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
--- Comment #6 from signupnathan at gmail dot com ---
OK. Noted.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
signupnathan at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think GCC is correct as it is processing the macros after they have been
redefined even though they are using #elif.